QtMoko v26 power priorities debate

Alfa21 freerunner at my.is.it
Tue Sep 14 23:54:10 CEST 2010

2010-09-14 at 20:39 Radek Polak

> Alfa21 wrote:
> > what do you think?
> > is it possible to change the priorities like:
> > CABLE over LOCK over BATTERY ?
> > 
> > do you think this use case is reasonable/common?
> Yes it's reasonable, but the way how it works was easiest to implement ;-) I 
> will try to take a look if i can fix it so that it works as you suggest - or 
> maybe some else want to send patch?
> Regards
> Radek

mhm... IIRC that was a workaround done because there was a bug (in an old qtmoko's monolithic kernel / module) which prevented to tell apart battery or cable status (now fixed also without this workaround)

the alternatives I see are:

1) (maybe really the easiest to implement) imho we could do a rollback to the previous state before that hack and take the habit of pressing the powerbttn shortly to immediately activate the sleep if desired (or wait for the suspend timeout if set) as it's possible also when the screen is locked

2) fix the priority as said before, so if we have the cable connected (and now i see it's correctly detected, can you confirm?) we follow the full triplet (dimm/disp.off/suspend) of the "on cable" whit priority over all the triplet of the "locked" state

3) find a way to check if we have a connection open and in this case ignore the suspend timeout. this could be interesting also when we are talking about a wifi connection or a car bluetooth system connection (if the FR goes in suspend we loose the ability to make outgoing calls from the system because we can't wake it by bluetooth) ...more or less the same way FR does not go in suspend during a phone call :P

I would choose the 1+3 solution... with 1 ready there and 3 implementable in a more future release.

what do you think? the debate is still open to the whole community! hehe ;)


More information about the community mailing list